Legal Synchronization of Bankruptcy Asset Distribution: Prioritizing Workers Over State Taxes (An Analysis of the Constitutional Court Decision No. 67/PUU-XI/2013 Regarding the Position of Workers and State Taxes in Bankruptcy Asset Distribution)
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.70062/greensocial.v2i2.194Keywords:
Bankruptcy Asset Distribution, Legal Synchronization, Workers’ Wage PriorityAbstract
This study examines the legal conflict between workers' wage claims and state tax obligations in bankruptcy proceedings under Indonesian law, focusing on the constitutional imperative to prioritize workers' rights. The Introduction contextualizes the tension between Article 95(4) of the Labor Law, which mandates wage prioritization, and tax legislation granting precedence to state claims, highlighting the landmark Constitutional Court Decision No. 67/PUU-XI/2013 that affirmed workers' constitutional rights to timely wages. Employing a Method of normative legal research, the analysis integrates statutory and case approaches, reviewing laws on bankruptcy (UU No. 37/2004), labor rights, and taxation, alongside judicial decisions and international frameworks like ILO Conventions No. 100 and 111. Results reveal that while the Constitutional Court’s decision established workers’ absolute priority over tax claims, regulatory disharmony persists due to conflicting provisions in the Tax Law (UU KUP) and the 2020 Job Creation Law (UU Cipta Kerja), which ambiguously subordinates tax claims only to secured creditors. Discussion underscores the necessity for legal synchronization to align labor and tax regulations, ensuring compliance with Gustav Radbruch’s principles of legal certainty and Hans Kelsen’s normative hierarchy. The study advocates legislative reforms to codify workers’ priority in bankruptcy, drawing parallels with Malaysia’s Employment Act 1955 and France’s AGS system, which institutionalize wage protection. By addressing regulatory contradictions, Indonesia can harmonize constitutional mandates with fiscal policies, balancing social justice and economic stability.
References
Asril. (2021). Reorganisasi perusahaan debitor yang terancam pailit sebagai suatu alternatif. Mulawarman Law Review, 5(2), 138–149. https://doi.org/10.30872/mulrev.v5i2.341
Asshiddiqie, J. (2015). Gagasan konstitusi sosial: Institusionalisasi dan konstitusionalisasi kehidupan sosial masyarakat madani. Jakarta: LP3ES.
Bergh, A., & Kärnä, A. (2024). Economic freedom and populism. In Handbook of Research on Economic Freedom (pp. 297–314). Edward Elgar Publishing. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781802206159.00030
Ermawan, A., & Yunus, A. (2019). Perlindungan hukum hak-hak tenaga kerja yang perusahaannya diputus pailit. Indonesian Journal of Criminal Law, 1(2), 100–108. https://doi.org/10.31960/ijocl.v1i2.246
Fajar, M. (2013). Dualisme penelitian hukum normatif dan empiris. Yogyakarta: Pustaka Pelajar.
Fitriyani, E., Tommy, P. H., Widodo, L., Ahmad, R. R., Ikhsan, J. N., & Lubis. (2024). Buku legal corporate. Medan: UNPRI Press.
Fuady, M. (2010). Hukum pailit dalam teori dan praktik. Bandung: PT. Citra Aditya Bakti.
Handoko, W. (2018). Kebijakan hukum pertanahan: Sebuah refleksi keadilan hukum progresif. Yogyakarta: Thafa Media.
Heriani, F. N. (2021). 5 peristiwa kepailitan dan PKPU paling menarik sepanjang 2021. Hukum Online. https://www.hukumonline.com/berita/a/5-peristiwa-kepalitan-dan-pkpu-paling-menarik-sepanjang-2021-lt61ce0a610c1e9
Hindrawan, P., Sunarmi, Ginting, B., & Harianto, D. (2023). Tanggung jawab kurator dalam menerapkan asas pari passu prorata parte dalam pengurusan dan pemberesan harta pailit. Locus: Journal of Academic and Literature Review, 8(2), 720–732. https://doi.org/10.56128/ljoalr.v2i8.223
Juwana, H., & Chandrawulan, A.-A. (2020). Hukum ketenagakerjaan Indonesia pasca Omnibus Law. Jakarta: Universitas Indonesia Press.
Kelsen, H. (2017). General theory of law & state. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203790960
Marchionatti, R. (2023). Smith and the savages in The Wealth of Nations, or the anthropology of political economy. In Adam Smith and Modernity (pp. 306–324). New York: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003301448-23
Marzuki, P. M. (2013). Pengantar ilmu hukum. Jakarta: Kencana Prenada Media Group.
Mulyadi, L. (n.d.). Perkara kepailitan dan penundaan kewajiban pembayaran utang (PKPU): Teori dan praktik. Bandung: Alumni.
Naim, S., Hasriyanti, H., Tuasikal, H., & Simanjuntak, K. W. (2022). Pemutusan hubungan kerja menurut Undang-Undang Nomor 13 Tahun 2003 tentang ketenagakerjaan (PT. Cendrawasih Dwimega Kencana Sorong). JUSTISI, 8(3), 163–176. https://doi.org/10.33506/js.v8i3.1899
Saputra, M. R., & Setiadi, W. (2024). Implementation of general principles of good government in the organization of the 2024 elections. International Journal of Law and Society, 1(3), 94–112. https://doi.org/10.62951/ijls.v1i3.65
Satudata. (n.d.). Kondisi ketenagakerjaan di Indonesia tahun 2021–2023. Satudata Kemnaker. https://satudata.kemnaker.go.id/infografik/59
Shubhan, M. H. (2020). Fenomena hukum pengajuan kepailitan terhadap pengusaha oleh pekerja karena hak pekerja yang tidak dibayar pengusaha. Jurnal Hukum dan Pembangunan, 50(2), 519. https://doi.org/10.21143/jhp.vol50.no2.2589
Sosiawan, U. M. S. A., & Ariani, N. V. (2017). Kepailitan dan penundaan kewajiban pembayaran utang: Studi hukum dalam rangka penyusunan naskah akademik RUU Nomor 37 Tahun 2004. Jakarta: Badan Penelitian dan Pengembangan Hukum dan HAM, Kementerian Hukum dan HAM.
Suci, I. D. A. (2016). Hubungan kepailitan kedudukan dan hak kreditor atas benda jaminan debitor pailit. Yogyakarta: Laksbang Presindo.
Sulistyawan, A. Y. (2019). Urgensi harmonisasi hukum nasional terhadap perkembangan hukum global akibat globalisasi. Jurnal Hukum Progresif, 7(2), 171–181. https://doi.org/10.14710/hp.7.2.171-181
Sumiarni, E. (2013). Metodologi penelitian hukum dan statistik. Yogyakarta: UAJY Press.
Suyatno, A. (2012). Pemanfaatan penundaan kewajiban pembayaran utang sebagai upaya mencegah kepailitan. Jakarta: Kencana.
Syahrani, R. (1992). Seluk beluk dan asas-asas hukum perdata. Bandung: Alumni.
Uvarova, O. (2025). The rule of law and corporate actors: Measuring influence. Hague Journal on the Rule of Law, 17(1), 1–29. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40803-024-00242-3
van Apeldoorn, L. (2021). Hobbes on property: Between legal certainty and sovereign discretion. Hobbes Studies, 34(1), 58–79. https://doi.org/10.1163/18750257-bja10024
Wantu, F. M. (2014). Kendala hakim dalam menciptakan kepastian hukum, keadilan, dan kemanfaatan di peradilan perdata. Mimbar Hukum Fakultas Hukum Universitas Gadjah Mada, 25(2), 205. https://doi.org/10.22146/jmh.16092
Yuhelson. (2019). Hukum kepailitan di Indonesia.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Green Social: International Journal of Law and Civil Affairs
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
